Buccaneers @ Packers - NFCC Playoff GDT - 1/24 - 2:05 CST

[Yoop]

If our only chance to win it all is Rodgers has to be perfect that is a sign of negligence to management and not to #12. Football is the ultimate team sport. Even the Almighty Brady had to have help by his teammates to win that game on Sunday.

Why is it always either an argument of management failing or Rodgers failing?

Why can't we just put onus on the players?

Why can't we say our Blue chippers in Z, Aaron Jones, Davante Adams let the team down and leave it at that?

Why can't we say our red chips and up and comers in Rashan Gary and Darnell Savage let us down on Sunday and leave it at that?

Why can't we say players who should have been fighting for a big contract in Aaron Jones and Kevin King cost this team a win and leave it at that?

The fact our high end players. Our players that put this team on the map did not come out and perform is not a neglect from management. It is the fact that our best players underperformed in the game that they cannot underperform.

Management did its job. There is not one player who let us down, outside of Kevin King, that this forum is not happy they are Packers. They are good players who just played a bad game.

hard to blame Jones to much, the first fumble was a helmet hit to the ball, the 2nd took him out of the game.

Adams I think is a bit different, how he dropped that ball or neglected to drag his foot is something he rarely ever does, he didn't bring his A game

King is terrible in press coverage, even off man, he doesn't have the hips to transition quickly, he's OK in zone, but he's certainly not a lock down corner, and if (and Iam sure we do) want to play prees and man then we need to replace King.

enough has been said concerning st's we need a new st's cord

Pettine simply doesn't seem at times to inspire his players, our pass rushers at times seem to take plays off, however I admit this seemed to be more of a early season thing, and could be blamed on covid cutting off season work outs and training, as the season we3nt along these issues started to decline, still he hates bringing a extra man when the 4 aren't getting to the QB, imo with some teams it's better to get pressure then drop a extra guy in coverage, we gave Brady all day to pick us apart and the extra coverage guy didn't seem to help, I'am fine with getting a new cord as long as there are no drastic over hauls, his schemes work just need to raise the intensity.

[Drj820]

I don't know how exactly our play calling works and I doubt we will ever have enough of a behind the scenes look to know for sure, so instead of placing blame on Rodgers or absolving Rodgers, I am placing a ton of blame on the Rodgers/LaFleur operation. Granted, it's not their fault our OT's got their butts kicked, but once it became apparent that they were, there needed to be some adjustment. More chipping, more help... something. Is that the play call or is that an adjustment to the protection at the line? Wherever that lies, it wasn't good enough. The run-pass balance, obviously, was way out of whack. Is that LaFleur calling too many passes or Rodgers checking off called runs? Tampa has a good run defense and didn't give us a ton of run looks like the Rams did, but Tampa doesn't need to. There front is stout enough to handle it. More creativity in the run game and flat out just more attempts were needed. Each of Jones, Williams, and Dillon had a 10+ yard run yet we completely abandoned the run as the game went on.

Some people are making a big deal out of Rodgers comments that he didn't know we were kicking a FG on 4th down and if he did he would have called a different play at the line on 3rd-down. I don't see that as an egregious miscommunication. That is 100% LaFleur's call based on 4 billion variables. I'm sure on 1st and 10 LaFleur is not thinking about what he is doing on 4th and 10. Maybe... maybe LaFleur knew before 3rd and 10 that if they didn't get it he was kicking, but I am guessing he didn't until he saw the 3rd down pass fall incomplete. I'm just not sure when this communication could have conceivably happened, but this is the least of my concerns from our HC/QB operation during the game.

Finally, the overbearing need to "get Davante Adams involved". I was astounded when I saw the box score and saw that he had 9 catches. Has any WR ever had a quieter 9 catch day? Tampa did a tremendous job taking Adams away and I really feel like we pressed too hard going to him time and time again.

+100000

[go pak go]

I don't know how exactly our play calling works and I doubt we will ever have enough of a behind the scenes look to know for sure, so instead of placing blame on Rodgers or absolving Rodgers, I am placing a ton of blame on the Rodgers/LaFleur operation. Granted, it's not their fault our OT's got their butts kicked, but once it became apparent that they were, there needed to be some adjustment. More chipping, more help... something. Is that the play call or is that an adjustment to the protection at the line? Wherever that lies, it wasn't good enough. The run-pass balance, obviously, was way out of whack. Is that LaFleur calling too many passes or Rodgers checking off called runs? Tampa has a good run defense and didn't give us a ton of run looks like the Rams did, but Tampa doesn't need to. There front is stout enough to handle it. More creativity in the run game and flat out just more attempts were needed. Each of Jones, Williams, and Dillon had a 10+ yard run yet we completely abandoned the run as the game went on.

Some people are making a big deal out of Rodgers comments that he didn't know we were kicking a FG on 4th down and if he did he would have called a different play at the line on 3rd-down. I don't see that as an egregious miscommunication. That is 100% LaFleur's call based on 4 billion variables. I'm sure on 1st and 10 LaFleur is not thinking about what he is doing on 4th and 10. Maybe... maybe LaFleur knew before 3rd and 10 that if they didn't get it he was kicking, but I am guessing he didn't until he saw the 3rd down pass fall incomplete. I'm just not sure when this communication could have conceivably happened, but this is the least of my concerns from our HC/QB operation during the game.

Finally, the overbearing need to "get Davante Adams involved". I was astounded when I saw the box score and saw that he had 9 catches. Has any WR ever had a quieter 9 catch day? Tampa did a tremendous job taking Adams away and I really feel like we pressed too hard going to him time and time again.

+100000

I was hopeful we learned our lesson after the Panthers game.

It appears we did not.

[Labrev]

Finally, the overbearing need to "get Davante Adams involved". I was astounded when I saw the box score and saw that he had 9 catches. Has any WR ever had a quieter 9 catch day? Tampa did a tremendous job taking Adams away and I really feel like we pressed too hard going to him time and time again.

Agreed!! And this is unquestionably a Rodgers thing. I remember him saying after one of our games that Adams did not get the ball enough, and that they have to find ways to get him the ball every game. That didn't surprise me because we have seen him seem to do that with a lot of "go-to" guys over the years: Finley, Nelson, etc.

But I really wish he had the outlook that "if they key in on X, then Y is wide-open to make plays and have a big game."

That's another reason why I don't share in the obsession that some have in showering Rodgers with WRs: he does not spread the ball around enough for that, and in fact neglects other receivers in favor of his go-to guy.

It irks me that he didn't seem to look for Tonyan in the red-zone the way he did Adams. That's an even bigger target with a near 80% completion rate when targeted. >.<

[NCF]

It was indeed the coaches fault for not aiding our tackles who were betting beat like a drum.

I think it's absolutely foolish to reach that absolute conclusion knowing how much power Rodgers has in the play calls, checks, and protection setting. I don't know and you don't know, but I am willing to bet that the right answer falls somewhere in between Rodgers and LaFleur.

[go pak go]

It was indeed the coaches fault for not aiding our tackles who were betting beat like a drum.

I think it's absolutely foolish to reach that absolute conclusion knowing how much power Rodgers has in the play calls, checks, and protection setting. I don't know and you don't know, but I am willing to bet that the right answer falls somewhere in between Rodgers and LaFleur.

Hahahaha. Oh my friend.

This entire board is about absolutes.

[NCF]

It was indeed the coaches fault for not aiding our tackles who were betting beat like a drum.

I think it's absolutely foolish to reach that absolute conclusion knowing how much power Rodgers has in the play calls, checks, and protection setting. I don't know and you don't know, but I am willing to bet that the right answer falls somewhere in between Rodgers and LaFleur.

Hahahaha. Oh my friend.

This entire board is about absolutes.

I was absolute in thinking about the degree of foolishness.

[Pugger]

It was indeed the coaches fault for not aiding our tackles who were betting beat like a drum.

I think it's absolutely foolish to reach that absolute conclusion knowing how much power Rodgers has in the play calls, checks, and protection setting. I don't know and you don't know, but I am willing to bet that the right answer falls somewhere in between Rodgers and LaFleur.

If you can't run the ball you can't have tackles getting beat like that. They were spinning tops on Sunday.

[Yoop]

It was indeed the coaches fault for not aiding our tackles who were betting beat like a drum.

I think it's absolutely foolish to reach that absolute conclusion knowing how much power Rodgers has in the play calls, checks, and protection setting. I don't know and you don't know, but I am willing to bet that the right answer falls somewhere in between Rodgers and LaFleur.

If you can't run the ball you can't have tackles getting beat like that. They were spinning tops on Sunday.

absolutely not

[bud fox]

It was indeed the coaches fault for not aiding our tackles who were betting beat like a drum.

I think it's absolutely foolish to reach that absolute conclusion knowing how much power Rodgers has in the play calls, checks, and protection setting. I don't know and you don't know, but I am willing to bet that the right answer falls somewhere in between Rodgers and LaFleur.

Hahahaha. Oh my friend.

This entire board is about absolutes.

Only the Sith deal in absolutes

[bud fox]

If our only chance to win it all is Rodgers has to be perfect that is a sign of negligence to management and not to #12. Football is the ultimate team sport. Even the Almighty Brady had to have help by his teammates to win that game on Sunday.

Why is it always either an argument of management failing or Rodgers failing?

Why can't we just put onus on the players?

Why can't we say our Blue chippers in Z, Aaron Jones, Davante Adams let the team down and leave it at that?

Why can't we say our red chips and up and comers in Rashan Gary and Darnell Savage let us down on Sunday and leave it at that?

Why can't we say players who should have been fighting for a big contract in Aaron Jones and Kevin King cost this team a win and leave it at that?

The fact our high end players. Our players that put this team on the map did not come out and perform is not a neglect from management. It is the fact that our best players underperformed in the game that they cannot underperform.

Management did its job. There is not one player who let us down, outside of Kevin King, that this forum is not happy they are Packers. They are good players who just played a bad game.

But do we have enough Blue Chippers on the D side of the ball? On defense we have Clark, Z, and Alexander that I would consider Blue Chippers. It appears we have more on O.

I would only count Clark and Alexander.

Alexander is our best on that side and proving to be close to the best defender in the NFL

[go pak go]

Why is it always either an argument of management failing or Rodgers failing?

Why can't we just put onus on the players?

Why can't we say our Blue chippers in Z, Aaron Jones, Davante Adams let the team down and leave it at that?

Why can't we say our red chips and up and comers in Rashan Gary and Darnell Savage let us down on Sunday and leave it at that?

Why can't we say players who should have been fighting for a big contract in Aaron Jones and Kevin King cost this team a win and leave it at that?

The fact our high end players. Our players that put this team on the map did not come out and perform is not a neglect from management. It is the fact that our best players underperformed in the game that they cannot underperform.

Management did its job. There is not one player who let us down, outside of Kevin King, that this forum is not happy they are Packers. They are good players who just played a bad game.

But do we have enough Blue Chippers on the D side of the ball? On defense we have Clark, Z, and Alexander that I would consider Blue Chippers. It appears we have more on O.

I would only count Clark and Alexander.

Alexander is our best on that side and proving to be close to the best defender in the NFL

Depends on your timeline right?

Sunday it was Clark and Alexander.

A couple of months ago Z was still considered a blue but was trailing off. The last half of the season Amos definitely deserves to be in the Blue conversation.

[Yoop]

But do we have enough Blue Chippers on the D side of the ball? On defense we have Clark, Z, and Alexander that I would consider Blue Chippers. It appears we have more on O.

I would only count Clark and Alexander.

Alexander is our best on that side and proving to be close to the best defender in the NFL

Depends on your timeline right?

Sunday it was Clark and Alexander.

A couple of months ago Z was still considered a blue but was trailing off. The last half of the season Amos definitely deserves to be in the Blue conversation.

Absolutely right Clark, Alexander, Z, Amos, with Gary and Savage looking to arrive next year, this defense is very close, I want to see more of Barnes, prior to the club he looked pretty good in coverage, and he quickly reacts to the read of the play, I"d replace King and add a DT to start with.

[Pckfn23]

[Pckfn23]

$%@# me sideways...

[Half Empty]

It was indeed the coaches fault for not aiding our tackles who were betting beat like a drum.

I think it's absolutely foolish to reach that absolute conclusion knowing how much power Rodgers has in the play calls, checks, and protection setting. I don't know and you don't know, but I am willing to bet that the right answer falls somewhere in between Rodgers and LaFleur.

If you can't run the ball you can't have tackles getting beat like that. They were spinning tops on Sunday.

How about if you (probably) can run, but choose not to do so?

[APB]

$%@# me sideways...

Why that guy continually saw the field this year is beyond me...

#tramonwouldahadthat

[go pak go]

$%@# me sideways...

Why that guy continually saw the field this year is beyond me...

#tramonwouldahadthat

That's how you miss a Super Bowl ladies and gentlemen.

[Pugger]

I think it's absolutely foolish to reach that absolute conclusion knowing how much power Rodgers has in the play calls, checks, and protection setting. I don't know and you don't know, but I am willing to bet that the right answer falls somewhere in between Rodgers and LaFleur.

If you can't run the ball you can't have tackles getting beat like that. They were spinning tops on Sunday.

How about if you (probably) can run, but choose not to do so?

Yes, they did abandon it but they weren't having much success until Dillon had some carries. I would have liked to have seen us use him more.

[BF004]

$%@# me sideways...

If he catches that, we are talking about how masterful Pettine’s D was having guys in position on the backend and just completely shut down the run.